New flamethrower and technique for them? -1 reply

Please wait...

Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#31 12 years ago

Thanks for the links and info. I understand that U.S. flamethrowers used gellied gasoline so were almost immpossible to blow up under regular conditions. I took a look at what you posted and It seems to cover mostly U.S. flamethrowers. I was thinknig that Russian, German, or some other nation's flamethrowers might have used a more explosive(or atleast more flammable) fuel mixture. And it is these other countries I can't find any information on.

The reason I press the issue is very simple. I have heard a number of stories on the history channel, on webpages, and other sources, coming right from soldier's mouthes, about flamethrowers exploding on the battlefield. Alot never specified a bullet as doing the damage but that fact that alot of soldiers say they've seen a flamethrower explode during battle has got to mean something.

Acually If I had to make a guess it would be that somehow the ignitor accidentally set off the tanks or something similar to that. I just find it hard to believe that all of these soldiers would say they've seen flamethrowers explode yet others say that it is immpossible. I would tend to trust the person who was faught along side, or with, these weapons over a person who has never been able to test all of this under combat conditions.

I'm just saying that there might be some variable that the different experts havn't thoguht of because they have never used these things in combat. Maybe it is the soldiers themselves doing something wrong with the tanks, allowing them to become explosive. Or maybe it is some combat condtion such as moisture that has rusted the tanks, or impacts doing some kind of damage to nozzles and hoses. Just playing the devil's advocate here.




tony238

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

20th January 2006

0 Uploads

10 Posts

0 Threads

#32 12 years ago
stylieLOL with the hot red haired chick!!! Ya gotta admit, the coding of it, just being actually able to do it is pretty cool, like mortars and blowing up barbed wire and such. Just shows us how capable those silly devs truly are. Only thing is, it seems to be able to destroy tanks pretty quick. Add this to the mythbusters episode.

And I thought I was the only one who found her hot. Learn something every day.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#33 11 years ago

Hi friends, if you are interested by flamethrower, you will find a lot of great info on this forum : Exotic Weaponry Forum - Powered by vBulletin have a nice day ! AL.




Cadyshack

Hey, you scratched my anchor!!

50 XP

4th July 2006

0 Uploads

759 Posts

0 Threads

#34 11 years ago

1) I believe there was a reason for the open flame at the open end of the flamethrower's ejection tube. It was to make the fuel combust and make it into a flamethrower. Otherwise, it would be a glorified Super-Soaker. 2) On the topic of improving them ingame, I do think (as suggested before) that a larger splash, and damage while moving through it is necessary (or something close to them). WaW has improved it by making a bigger splash (probably a little overkill, though), but it still has the "walk through" thing. Even better, just make them shoot out a jet of constant flame in a straight line for something like 10 or so feet in front of the firer (or however long WW2 flamethrowers could shoot a flame). Another thing I felt was that there is so little fuel you had in FH1 and it is used up so quickly, plus, it only reloads about 3/4ths of a tank at an ammo box. May I ask for a longer duration to make this kit better to actually use?




General_Henry

Veteran Tanker

50 XP

29th April 2006

0 Uploads

1,699 Posts

0 Threads

#35 11 years ago
Cadyshack;37741501) I believe there was a reason for the open flame at the open end of the flamethrower's ejection tube. It was to make the fuel combust and make it into a flamethrower. Otherwise, it would be a glorified Super-Soaker. 2) On the topic of improving them ingame, I do think (as suggested before) that a larger splash, and damage while moving through it is necessary (or something close to them). WaW has improved it by making a bigger splash (probably a little overkill, though), but it still has the "walk through" thing. Even better, just make them shoot out a jet of constant flame in a straight line for something like 10 or so feet in front of the firer (or however long WW2 flamethrowers could shoot a flame). Another thing I felt was that there is so little fuel you had in FH1 and it is used up so quickly, plus, it only reloads about 3/4ths of a tank at an ammo box. May I ask for a longer duration to make this kit better to actually use?

wouldn't it be unrealistic to have high fuel cap?...if the damage is realistic, of course.

i hope the wooden stuffs could "catch fire"....it would make the flamethrower much more powerful :D BURN BURN BURN BURN!

of course to counter it you would need a fire extinguishers to put off the fire




Ronin Pedroshin

GF is my bext friend *hugs GF*

50 XP

13th June 2004

0 Uploads

878 Posts

0 Threads

#36 11 years ago
StrangerThanFiction;2887705 There is no such thing as "fire" or "flammable materials" or gasoline in BF2. Intead we have kits, projectiles and particle effects. Much of the behavior you describe would require a physics and materials system that is light years ahead of any game I know of. Possibly some kind of "creative workaround" would be possible, but we usually try not to drive the coders insane on creative workaround to create oddball features for weapons that are very rare, even on the few maps in which they appear at all. Indded, flamethrowers in BF1942 were a creative workaround to begin with. A better way is to think of things that already occur in the game, in some other context, and figure out an new context in which to apply it.

Hmm I was just thinking about the way vehicles are set to flames when they are destroyed. In PR it even makes you lose health by standing too close to them. I wonder if there's some way to apply this to flamethrowers...




foodmaniac2003

Gelato pwns all

50 XP

11th March 2006

0 Uploads

2,875 Posts

0 Threads

#37 11 years ago

Gah, one of my noob threads =p




Who_Flung_Poo?

No I don't know who did.

50 XP

4th November 2003

0 Uploads

5,360 Posts

0 Threads

#38 11 years ago

I think we should have a sticky thread for noob threads like this.




J_Fin

GF is my bext friend *hugs GF*

50 XP

15th March 2007

0 Uploads

868 Posts

0 Threads

#39 11 years ago

:rolleyes:

(look up in the Suggestion forum):lol: